Jump to content

Trump: "loan, not gift" for Ukraine


Recommended Posts

A third largest stock of nukes given up for the "guarantees of security". The goods: payment now, the guarantee, as a service for an extended period.

Three decades on, the partner has forgotten that something was given and is talking about "lending". You pay for something you already given and he pretends that he isn't fulfilling an obligation but providing charity, free gift. 

You know the word for this business right? Embezzlement. Crookedness. Else?

Is this the new image of the United States, before the world?

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • myata changed the title to Trump: "loan, not gift" for Ukraine

"In 1994, Ukraine agreed to transfer these weapons (third largest stockpile at the time - M.) to Russia and became a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, in exchange for assurances from Russia, the United States and United Kingdom to respect the Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.

Interesting times: we will know all there's to know. One party has all but given itself to the balloon of hot stinky air: no critical thought; no intelligence; almost no integrity left.

Let's see what the other still has. Will it keep playing into its hands, ignoring the pleas of those who defend their freedom bleeding every day, forget the "guarantees"?

All will be revealed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, myata said:

A third largest stock of nukes given up for the "guarantees of security". The goods: payment now, the guarantee, as a service for an extended period.

Three decades on, the partner has forgotten that something was given and is talking about "lending". You pay for something you already given and he pretends that he isn't fulfilling an obligation but providing charity, free gift. 

You know the word for this business right? Embezzlement. Crookedness. Else?

Is this the new image of the United States, before the world?

The US (Sec. of State James Baker) already told Russia that the US would "not shift 1 inch eastwards" if Russia left East Germany, which they did. 

FYI, Ukraine threatening to join NATO is at the heart of this matter, and the US has been outspoken about Ukraine in NATO ever since Biden was VP. 

Stop worrying about "America's reputation" in that region. That ship has sailed, and their only plan now is naked aggression.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The US (Sec. of State James Baker) already told Russia that the US would "not shift 1 inch eastwards" if Russia left East Germany, which they did. 

The Budapest Memorandum guaranteeing Ukraine's security is in WRITING. Baker's "promise" is NOT.

Where did the US "shift 1 inch eastwards"? We didn't. Germany was unified and we have no missiles in the East.

Meanwhile Russia has shit canned Budapest Memo.

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

FYI, Ukraine threatening to join NATO is at the heart of this matter, and the US has been outspoken about Ukraine in NATO ever since Biden was VP. 

No agreements to prohibit NATO APPLICATIONS. Duh

Ukraine is NOT in NATO.

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Stop worrying about "America's reputation" in that region. That ship has sailed, and their only plan now is naked aggression.  

US is NOT fighting in Ukraine, your fantasy notwithstanding. We (and Canada) are guaranteeing Ukraine security with military aid per the Memo that Russia has BLATANTLY VIOLATED.

Quote
Assistance captured in the Agreement on Security Cooperation between Canada and Ukraine. Canada will provide critical financial and military support to Ukraine in 2024, including new financial support for Ukraine to meet its balance of payments and budgetary needs and stabilize its economy.Feb 24, 2024

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Micael was asking for clarification on this:

"Speaking at his Mar-a-Lago estate, Donald Trump indicated that Republicans could back additional Ukraine aid, though preferably as a “loan, not just a gift.” Former US President Donald Trump has indicated that “Republicans are ready to support additional aid to Ukraine if it is provided in the form of a loan.”

not for obfuscation regarding  barely relevant past treaties.

Typical Trump. worry about the money; not the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, herbie said:

barely relevant past treaties.

"Barely relevant"? What about the living, glaring example of the "guarantees"? Who in their right mind now, seeing and hearing this, would let go of the nukes as opposed to getting them at the first opportunity.

As a result of this, the international system of security is finished, dead. This is what happens if one doesn't remember and observe their commitments. Some "barely".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, myata said:

What about the living, glaring example of the "guarantees"?

That is a moot point, What was done is done and has no relevance to solving the current situation. Especially dredging up anti-US propaganda by our Russian troll members as if those Eastern countries themselves didn't come running as fast as they could to join NATO and even the non-aligned did too because of Putin's agression.

It merely points out the Russia is led by an untrustworthy c*nt, and electing another to run America wouldn't help Ukraine in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2024 at 8:33 AM, WestCanMan said:

The US (Sec. of State James Baker) already told Russia that the US would "not shift 1 inch eastwards" if Russia left East Germany, which they did. 

FYI, Ukraine threatening to join NATO is at the heart of this matter, and the US has been outspoken about Ukraine in NATO ever since Biden was VP. 

Stop worrying about "America's reputation" in that region. That ship has sailed, and their only plan now is naked aggression.  

The US didn’t shift anything. Countries ask to join NATO and they have to be approved by every member. There are no US troops based in former Warsaw Pact countries.

Obviously Ukraine should have been a NATO member, they would have never been attacked and there would be no war to talk about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

The US didn’t shift anything. Countries ask to join NATO and they have to be approved by every member. There are no US troops based in former Warsaw Pact countries.

That might pass for integrity from a leftard, but I'm gonna have to just pass on slithering with you wormy little imps, thanks. 

Quote

Obviously Ukraine should have been a NATO member, they would have never been attacked and there would be no war to talk about.

Well, obviously there's a period between "getting serious about joining" and "being in NATO", and that' the point where the war occurred. Look at all the flat cities... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

That might pass for integrity from a leftard, but I'm gonna have to just pass on slithering with you wormy little imps, thanks. 

 

As opposed to your unquestioning acceptance of Putins aggression. The devil made me do it excuse to justify the destruction of a country and hundreds of thousand lives.  Russia invaded Ukraine. 

 

Quote

Well, obviously there's a period between "getting serious about joining" and "being in NATO", and that' the point where the war occurred. Look at all the flat cities... 

If Ukraine had been a NATO member, there would be no flat cities. Russia invaded Ukraine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Aristides said:

As opposed to your unquestioning acceptance of Putins aggression. The devil made me do it excuse to justify the destruction of a country and hundreds of thousand lives.  Russia invaded Ukraine. 

It's not "aggression" you wee fool. 

It's preventing a hostile, aggressive army from camping next door. Kennedy almost started WWIII for less. 

Quote

If Ukraine had been a NATO member, there would be no flat cities. Russia invaded Ukraine. 

The path to putting NATO on Russia's doorstep... leads through a war.

That's where we are now. 

We're right effing here and you still don't understand. Look around, dummy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

It's not "aggression" you wee fool. 

It's preventing a hostile, aggressive army from camping next door. Kennedy almost started WWIII for less. 

The path to putting NATO on Russia's doorstep... leads through a war.

That's where we are now. 

We're right effing here and you still don't understand. Look around, dummy. 

 

Invading a country that was not threatening you is not aggression? You are a super fool.

What hostile aggressive army? The only NATO troops based in former Warsaw Pact countries are in the Baltic states, at their request and in Poland, also at its request. Before Vlad invaded Ukraine, there were no US or NATO troops based in Poland. Vlad's invasion of Ukraine has increased NATO presence in the region, including a new 1300 km long border with a formal neutral with a very capable military. Finland, with another new member country and former neutral with a capable military backing them up, Sweden. Until Vlad invaded Ukraine, defence spending by European NATO countries were at post Cold War lows. Now they are pouring money into defence spending because they see Putin as a real threat. If NATO is much stronger now, Putin has only himself to blame.

I have looked around and the number of useful fools like you is quite alarming.

 

Edited by Aristides
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Invading a country that was not threatening you is not aggression? You are a super fool.

Who said that the US/NATO were not threatening Russia? 

Just you. 

Does Russia feel threatened by NATO? 

Ummmm, do NATO countries have most of their nukes aimed at Russia? If Biden wakes up from a nappty-time nightmare and just punches in the codes, where would 75% of the nukes just automatically go?

When NATO armies, navies and AF's strategize, what enemies do you think they draw up plans to "defend themselves from"?

I was in a NATO military dude, we did ship and plane recognition briefings for Russian ships and planes. No one else. Not even China. 

We'd be shown silhouettes of the Kirov, Kresga I, II and III, Sovremny, etc, and they'd say "That's what our enemy's ships look like". They'd talk about what types of weapons they have, etc. We trained to kill those guys. "These torpedoes will chase those Russian subs."

Don't try to tell me what we talked about in basic training, and on those ships, I f'ing lived on them.

In basic, when you learn to fire the FN (now C7) they say "When Ivan and Igor come over the hill..." When were practicing with our rifles or firing the ship's main guns we'd say things like "Kill a commie for mommy." 

If Russians don't feel threatened then how do they have so many chess grand-masters in their history? They ARE threatened. And there's a war now. Constantly appeasing an enemy power is a mistake, right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

If Russians don't feel threatened then how do they have so many chess grand-masters in their history? They ARE threatened. And there's a war now. Constantly appeasing an enemy power is a mistake, right? 

Sure. Russia's developing "chess grand-masters" to fight off foreign military threats. LMAO

You are delusional. 

In REALITY Putin WANTS to STEAL the huge gas reserves off the Southern coast of Ukraine far more than he cares about NATO presence in Ukraine, and he certainly doesn't want them competing with Russia's energy sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Who said that the US/NATO were not threatening Russia? 

Just you. 

Does Russia feel threatened by NATO? 

Ummmm, do NATO countries have most of their nukes aimed at Russia? If Biden wakes up from a nappty-time nightmare and just punches in the codes, where would 75% of the nukes just automatically go?

When NATO armies, navies and AF's strategize, what enemies do you think they draw up plans to "defend themselves from"?

I was in a NATO military dude, we did ship and plane recognition briefings for Russian ships and planes. No one else. Not even China. 

We'd be shown silhouettes of the Kirov, Kresga I, II and III, Sovremny, etc, and they'd say "That's what our enemy's ships look like". They'd talk about what types of weapons they have, etc. We trained to kill those guys. "These torpedoes will chase those Russian subs."

Don't try to tell me what we talked about in basic training, and on those ships, I f'ing lived on them.

In basic, when you learn to fire the FN (now C7) they say "When Ivan and Igor come over the hill..." When were practicing with our rifles or firing the ship's main guns we'd say things like "Kill a commie for mommy." 

If Russians don't feel threatened then how do they have so many chess grand-masters in their history? They ARE threatened. And there's a war now. Constantly appeasing an enemy power is a mistake, right? 

Who says they are other than Putin and his useful fools?

The only European countries with nuclear capability are Britain and France. Britain's nuclear deterrent is 100% SLBM, and so is most of the French deterrent. France has a few warheads that can be delivered by aircraft, neither country has ground based missiles to deliver nuclear warheads. The only US nuclear warheads are an estimated 100 gravity bombs stored in Germany, Italy, Belgium and Turkey, none in eastern Europe. 

Where do you think Russian nukes are aimed and who is the only person to repeatedly threaten their use?

How will Russia be less threatened if it occupies Ukraine and is confronted by a stronger NATO with the possibility of nukes based in Eastern Europe as a result of its aggression? 

Putin's invasion of Ukraine is a blatant land grab, he got away with it in Crimea and thought he could do it again. It has nothing to do with any threat from NATO but you are only too happy to swallow what that gangster is peddling.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Who says they are other than Putin and his useful fools?

The only European countries with nuclear capability are Britain and France. Britain's nuclear deterrent is 100% SLBM, and so is most of the French deterrent. France has a few warheads that can be delivered by aircraft, neither country has ground based missiles to deliver nuclear warheads. The only US nuclear warheads are an estimated 100 gravity bombs stored in Germany, Italy, Belgium and Turkey, none in eastern Europe. 

Am I to believe that a random civilian posting on the internet has full knowledge of all the locations and transportation modes possible for all of America's nukes? There are no tactical nukes in America's arsenal, and no hypersonic or stealth missiles that can deliver them?

Gimme a break. 

In any event, no one wants America's hostile army right on their doorstep. 

Quote

Where do you think Russian nukes are aimed and who is the only person to repeatedly threaten their use?

So maybe don't be dicks? I never signed up to be a part of this NATO.

I have more respect of Iranian soldiers guarding Iran right now - that's what men do - than American and Canadian soldiers encroaching on Russia. 

Quote

How will Russia be less threatened if it occupies Ukraine and is confronted by a stronger NATO with the possibility of nukes based in Eastern Europe as a result of its aggression? 

Look up "aggression" in the dictionary. Look at how NATO has been expanding in the last 30 years, dummy. 

Quote

Putin's invasion of Ukraine is a blatant land grab, he got away with it in Crimea and thought he could do it again. It has nothing to do with any threat from NATO but you are only too happy to swallow what that gangster is peddling.

So you're admitting that you have no idea why Putin went into Crimea in the first place? 

God, what a f-tard you are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Am I to believe that a random civilian posting on the internet has full knowledge of all the locations and transportation modes possible for all of America's nukes? There are no tactical nukes in America's arsenal, and no hypersonic or stealth missiles that can deliver them?

Gimme a break. 

Of course not, you will believe whatever Putin tells you. You don't fact check anything.

Quote

In any event, no one wants America's hostile army right on their doorstep. 

America's army is not on their doorstep, their deployments are a matter of record.

Quote

So maybe don't be dicks? I never signed up to be a part of this NATO.

What NATO is that, the one that has guaranteed peace in Europe since WW2. NATO's new members joined by choice because they know what Russia is all about after living under the Soviet boot for almost 50 years.

Quote

 

I have more respect of Iranian soldiers guarding Iran right now - that's what men do - than American and Canadian soldiers encroaching on Russia. 

Look up "aggression" in the dictionary. Look at how NATO has been expanding in the last 30 years, dummy. 

So you're admitting that you have no idea why Putin went into Crimea in the first place? 

God, what a f-tard you are. 

 

Putin went into Crimea because he wanted it and id*ots like you cheered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Of course not, you will believe whatever Putin tells you. You don't fact check anything.

Holy crap, pal, you've literally committed every Dem/Lib talking point of the last ten years to memory and then just belched them out here as gospel truth. You're the last person on earth with any room to talk about credulity and fact-checking, and when you look at the level of cultish id10cy around here, that's no mean feat. 

Of course the Americans have nuclear warheads built to fit into all different types of missiles. 

Here's a leftist rag talking about America's comfort level with nukes: https://www.vox.com/world/23409451/secret-history-of-americas-tactical-nukes

Don't try to tell me they just have a few here and there.

FYI when you read Jane's or any of those mags that talk about the wartime capabilities of vessels, everyone has stuff that's ready to go that's not listed in there.

Quote

America's army is not on their doorstep, their deployments are a matter of record.

I never said that America's armies are perched on Russia's doorstep. I never even said that they're in Estonia or Latvia.

But this creeping NATO encroachment has been going on for decades, and there's no end in sight. In fact, adding Ukraine to NATO is a massive escalation in it. 

So what do you think, Aristedes? Was this the last of it? Is the plan for everyone to just sing Kumbaya now, you f'ing m0r0n? Does NATO finally have all the lebensraum they need? 

Quote

What NATO is that, the one that has guaranteed peace in Europe since WW2. NATO's new members joined by choice because they know what Russia is all about after living under the Soviet boot for almost 50 years.

 Is there peace in Europe right now, stupid? 

Why not? 

Who is instigating there? 

Don't worry, I was never expecting an honest answer.

Quote

Putin went into Crimea because he wanted it and id*ots like you cheered.

Not even close, stupid. Even in a leftist history class you'd get a zero there. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

Holy crap, pal, you've literally committed every Dem/Lib talking point of the last ten years to memory and then just belched them out here as gospel truth. You're the last person on earth with any room to talk about credulity and fact-checking, and when you look at the level of cultish id10cy around here, that's no mean feat. 

Of course the Americans have nuclear warheads built to fit into all different types of missiles. 

https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-u-s-nuclear-weapons-in-europe/

 

Quote

I never said that America's armies are perched on Russia's doorstep. I never even said that they're in Estonia or Latvia.

But this creeping NATO encroachment has been going on for decades, and there's no end in sight. In fact, adding Ukraine to NATO is a massive escalation in it. 

So what do you think, Aristedes? Was this the last of it? Is the plan for everyone to just sing Kumbaya now, you f'ing m0r0n? Does NATO finally have all the lebensraum they need? 

NATO is not a country, it is barely a political entity. It is a group of independent countries that have committed themselves to defend each other if one of them is attacked from the outside. THAT'S ALL. 

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm

Article 1.

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

Quote

Is there peace in Europe right now, stupid? 

Why not? 

Who is instigating there? 

Don't worry, I was never expecting an honest answer.

No there isn't because Russia invaded its neighbour and is trying to take half its territory if not the whole thing.

Quote

Not even close, stupid. Even in a leftist history class you'd get a zero there. 

Nothing to do with left or right, everything to do with right an wrong. Putin is using the same game plan as Hitler did to annex Austria and Czechoslovakia and attack Poland and you id*iots lap it up.

Quote

To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child.

Cicero

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Holy propaganda victim Batman.

Quote

NATO is not a country, it is barely a political entity. It is a group of independent countries that have committed themselves to defend each other if one of them is attacked from the outside. THAT'S ALL. 

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm

Article 1.

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

Again, you're just a propaganda victim. 

Iran is probably the only country on earth that is honest when they talk about military policies/strategy: "Kill all the Jews". 

Literally every other nation and alliance has a hidden agenda and ulterior motives. 

You have the geopolitical awareness of an excel spreadsheet: "Uhhh, this is how many tanks they say they have and they would only use them to defend their own country."

Quote

No there isn't

Holy crap you got half marks for once. Call it a day, bro. Take a victory lap. 

Quote

because Russia invaded its neighbour and is trying to take half its territory if not the whole thing.

And there's a 'because' that precedes that one. Can you guess what it is? 

Quote

Nothing to do with left or right, everything to do with right an wrong.

Everything to do with the left. This whole war is the result of Obama and Biden pushing NATO into Ukraine.

Leftists can never stray from the cult's gospel. 

Quote

because Russia invaded its neighbour and is trying to take half its territory if not the whole thing.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Quote

Putin is using the same game plan as Hitler did to annex Austria and Czechoslovakia and attack Poland

Putin is doing exactly what Kennedy did in 1962, the years after his failed Bay of Pigs invasion, stupid.

Quote

and you id*iots lap it up.

Coming from you 😂

Quote

To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child.

This must be your song:

 

Edited by WestCanMan
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Cicero

No, that's an unreasonably positive assessment. A child can learn still under the right conditions and in the right environment. Being stupid enough to ignore all the knowledge accumulated before probably means that one is too dumb to learn at all. Just dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,741
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    timwilson
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • User earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • User went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Videospirit went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...